3patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing into the United States itsiCloud product and service, which uses the claimed method of duplicating digital data.10.
As a result of Defendant‟s infringing activities
with respect to the „
362 patent,Plaintiff has suffered damages in an amount not yet ascertained. Plaintiff is entitled to recoverdamages adequate to compensate it for
Defendant‟s infringing activities in an amount to be
determined at trial, but in no event less than reasonable royalties, together with interest and costs.
Defendant‟s infringement of Plaintiff‟s exclusive rights under the ‟
362 patent will continue todamage Plaintiff, causing irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unlessenjoined by this Court.11.
Plaintiff reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Defendant
of the „
362 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling Plaintiff to increased damages under 35
U.S.C. § 284, and to attorneys‟ fees incurred in prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285
COUNT TWOINFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,392,283
Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs of thisComplaint, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.13.
Plaintiff is the owner of all right, title, and interest in United States Patent No.7,392,283,
Method and System for Supplying Products from Pre-Stored Digital Data in
Response to Demands Transmitted Via Computer Network,”
duly and legally issued by theUnited States Patent and Trademark Office on June 24, 2008 (
patent”). A true andcorrect copy of the ‟
283 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.14.
Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe, literally and/or under the
doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the ‟283 patent under 35 U.S.C.
§ 271 by making,using, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing into the United States the patented invention